• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What are some of the reasons people will vote for Romney/Ryan?

zimmer said:
Not all Democrats, but the Party, and especially the powers running the party; whether it's at the state level, unions, federally... the party is simply anti-American at its core.
Those that support them must like that sort of thing or are too thick to realize what they support.

Biden was a model Democrat last night... and Obama is similar... he just hides it better. Jeremiah Wright with some acting skills.
Click to expand...

I don't think their leadership is any more anti-American than the leadership of the republican party, They're both after the same thing - gain dominance for their party. America, and her people, are almost an afterthought to them. Just used to reach that goal. Both sides seek to "win" at all costs, even if they have to salt the earth behind them.

However, when it comes to Biden versus Ryan, Ryan has the edge in that regard. Biden was a senator and far less connected to the people, far more connected to the power brokers of his party, whereas Ryan is a representative and still has some connection to the people.
 
Boo Radley said:
There are plenty of doctors with concerns (largely medicare concerns). Not hospitals. There is a difference.
Click to expand...

Yeah hospitals will be running at peak efficiency and render the best care ever without those "plenty of doctors with concerns".
 
Fisher said:
Yeah hospitals will be running at peak efficiency and render the best care ever without those "plenty of doctors with concerns".
Click to expand...

Doctors will still work at hospitals. The concerns will be felt elsewhere, if at all. Concerns don't equal no care.
 
Boo Radley said:
There are plenty of doctors with concerns (largely medicare concerns). Not hospitals. There is a difference.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The governing committees of the hospitals are, wait for it, doctors. Hospitals aren't in the position to refuse ANY payment, no matter how slight. However, they're in the perverbial spot between the rock and the hard place. The specialists they rely upon are dropping medicare patients like hot rocks while the hospital has to take up the slack. They can't live with medicare, can't live without it.

What happens is that elder care in hospitals suffers. Patients are rushed through (they're going to die soon anyway) and the staff is trained to not suggest aggressive treatments. Saw it with my own father at the end of his life. Saw it daily as an LVN. Hear about it all the time now from our clients (doctors and nurses themselves).
 
clownboy said:
I don't think their leadership is any more anti-American than the leadership of the republican party, They're both after the same thing - gain dominance for their party. America, and her people, are almost an afterthought to them. Just used to reach that goal. Both sides seek to "win" at all costs, even if they have to salt the earth behind them.
Click to expand...
You don't... I do.

Democrats will do anything to gain power so they can continue to turn this into another EU styled state. Don't believe me?

What party votes to send people to war, the most serious vote anyone can make, send the troops off to war, and then turn around and stab the troops in the back in their hour of greatest need? Democrats. Why? Political expediency. That is the lowest action a politician could make, and the entire Democrat party was behind it... except for Joe Lieberman... and they did their best to rip him out of the party. They did... and Joe won with help of Republican votes. You may have forgotten this... I NEVER WILL. EVER. Democrats are dangerous to our nation. They are anti-American.
 
Has any group facing possible regulation or funding cuts ever NOT claimed that the sky will fall if if the regulations pass or their funding is cut? And yet the sky always seem to remain in place.
 
clownboy said:
Nonsense. The governing committees of the hospitals are, wait for it, doctors. Hospitals aren't in the position to refuse ANY payment, no matter how slight. However, they're in the perverbial spot between the rock and the hard place. The specialists they rely upon are dropping medicare patients like hot rocks while the hospital has to take up the slack. They can't live with medicare, can't live without it.

What happens is that elder care in hospitals suffers. Patients are rushed through (they're going to die soon anyway) and the staff is trained to not suggest aggressive treatments. Saw it with my own father at the end of his life. Saw it daily as an LVN. Hear about it all the time now from our clients (doctors and nurses themselves).
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not entirely true. Doctors are employees. There are many professionals in a hospital. And they treat more than medicare patients. For hospitals, medicare patients are not their largest problem. The uninsured are. Elder care has a larger impact in nursing homes and long term care facilities. And even if medicare pays less than doctors or hospitals want, getting much less (and none is many cases) without medicare is hardly going to help them.

You also must have clearly worked a poor hospital. I've worked at a few, and nothing reform has done plays in role in how we care for people. Human beings make those choices as they give care. I've seen doctors and hospitals give quality care knowing they won't be paid for it. Humans make those choices. Not governments or legislation.
 
AdamT said:
Has any group facing possible regulation or funding cuts ever NOT claimed that the sky will fall if if the regulations pass or their funding is cut? And yet the sky always seem to remain in place.
Click to expand...

Well... that is simply false... 100% false. And it hurts those the Lefties claim they want to help most.

Government taxes smokes and alcohol for what reason? To curb behavior... reduce it use. What does that do to companies? Reduces revenues which kills jobs. Taxes and regulations... kill investment and the jobs that go with it.

Let me provide you another example. Dems pushed for and got a "luxury tax" passed on items like yachts. Do you know what happened? Obviously not. The boat industry tanked. Absolutely tanked. People and families lost their jobs. Clinton and the Dems quietly repealed it. They tried to stick it to the rich... and ended up farking those they claimed to help... You see... Capitalism...trickle down works; Tax, spend, punish... trickle down government doesn't.

When Congress imposed a 10 percent luxury tax on yachts, private airplanes and expensive automobiles, Sen. Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share of taxes. What actually happened is laid out in a Heartland Institute blog post by Edmund Contoski titled "Economically illiterate Obama, re: Corporate Jets" (7/12/2011).


Within eight months after the change in the law took effect, Viking Yachts, the largest U.S. yacht manufacturer, laid off 1,140 of its 1,400 employees and closed one of its two manufacturing plants. Before it was all over, Viking Yachts was down to 68 employees. In the first year, one-third of U.S. yacht-building companies stopped production, and according to a report by the congressional Joint Economic Committee, the industry lost 7,600 jobs. When it was over, 25,000 workers had lost their jobs building yachts, and 75,000 more jobs were lost in companies that supplied yacht parts and material. Ocean Yachts trimmed its workforce from 350 to 50. Egg Harbor Yachts went from 200 employees to five and later filed for bankruptcy. The U.S., which had been a net exporter of yachts, became a net importer as U.S. companies closed. Jobs shifted to companies in Europe and the Bahamas. The U.S. Treasury collected zero revenue from the sales driven overseas.

Ignorance, Stupidity or Connivance? - Walter E. Williams - [page]
Click to expand...

Over regulate... business moves... overtax and people just stop spending or stop taking risk. When that happens you have stagnation.

Action or inaction has consequences. The sky doesn't just stay in place... especially today when companies can move easily and often if necessary... and rightly so.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Are you sure don't you just accept lies?

The NRCC repeats the false Republican claim that the Affordable Care Act would “gut” $716 billion from Medicare. The law cuts that much in the growth of Medicare, extending its solvency for eight more years.

FactCheck.org : NRCC Claims Democrat Will End Medicare
Click to expand...

Wow. 8 whole years. That's SOOO awesome.

And seriously, I just expalined the issue with the medicare cuts on a different thread. The issue is a very real one.
 
1) Obama is incompetent and was elected for specious reasons including white guilt

2) Obama has declared jihad against the people who do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to funding government programs

3) Obama is trying to expand the number of those who are net tax consumers at the expense of those who are net tax payers

4) Obama is trying to balkanize America

5) Obama will appoint and has appointed anti gun justices and judges

6) Biden is a moron, Ryan is bright

7) Romney has a proven track record of accomplishments and achievement-Obama's track record is getting rich through the government and engaging in corruption

8) Obama caters to class envy, dependency and parasitic behavior

9) the issues I disagree with Romney on do not affect me as profoundly as the issues I disagree with Obama on
 
CJ 2.0 said:
Wow. 8 whole years. That's SOOO awesome.

And seriously, I just expalined the issue with the medicare cuts on a different thread. The issue is a very real one.
Click to expand...

You don't tackle real issue with false claims. It hurts your credibility.
 
Boo Radley said:
You don't tackle real issue with false claims. It hurts your credibility.
Click to expand...

That's what I've been trying to point out to Obama and his supporters for yours now.

Seriously, the reductions to medicare funding have very real effects, completely unrelated to the straw man arguments invented by Obama and his campaign.

Oh, and an 8 year extension of solvency on a massive entitlement program is f***ing useless. 2023 or 24 or whatever date they pulled out of their asses doesn't actually FIX the problem, now does it, considering very many of the SAME seniors using the program now will still be using it then.
 
CJ 2.0 said:
That's what I've been trying to point out to Obama and his supporters for yours now.

Seriously, the reductions to medicare funding have very real effects, completely unrelated to the straw man arguments invented by Obama and his campaign.

Oh, and an 8 year extension of solvency on a massive entitlement program is f***ing useless. 2023 or 24 or whatever date they pulled out of their asses doesn't actually FIX the problem, now does it, considering very many of the SAME seniors using the program now will still be using it then.
Click to expand...

So specifically, what has Romney provided as a plan to solve Medicare and Social Security?
 
zimmer said:
Well... that is simply false... 100% false. And it hurts those the Lefties claim they want to help most.

Government taxes smokes and alcohol for what reason? To curb behavior... reduce it use. What does that do to companies? Reduces revenues which kills jobs. Taxes and regulations... kill investment and the jobs that go with it.
Click to expand...

That's your great example? Tobacco and alcohol are heavily regulated and the companies that make those products are still hugely profitable. Any more examples? How about insurance? Insurance is heavily regulated and insurance companies are hugely profitable. Banks? Banks are heavily regulated and they are among the most profitable companies in the world. Oil? Oil companies are heavily regulated and, as a group, are the most profitable companies in the world. Pharmaceuticals? Same story.

So no, regulation in and of itself does not mean economic death.
 
Boo Radley said:
Doctors will still work at hospitals. The concerns will be felt elsewhere, if at all. Concerns don't equal no care.
Click to expand...

Since not that many established private practice doctors in my area have privileges at the only hospital in my city after the for profit facility tried to make them work there for peanuts, I an skeptical that quality of care will not be impacted when downward payment pressure is put on all hospitals. Unless it is literally life or death people already go to other hospitals in the region. When the husband of a woman I know had a heart attack, he was given meds in the ER and had to be airlifted to another hospital about an hour away by ground because the cardiologist was not working when he came into the ER. WTF kind of cutbacks can you make if you cannot even keep a cardiologist available 24/7--it isn't like heart attacks are rare occurrences?
 
TurtleDude said:
1) Obama is incompetent and was elected for specious reasons including white guilt

2) Obama has declared jihad against the people who do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to funding government programs

3) Obama is trying to expand the number of those who are net tax consumers at the expense of those who are net tax payers

4) Obama is trying to balkanize America

5) Obama will appoint and has appointed anti gun justices and judges

6) Biden is a moron, Ryan is bright

7) Romney has a proven track record of accomplishments and achievement-Obama's track record is getting rich through the government and engaging in corruption

8) Obama caters to class envy, dependency and parasitic behavior

9) the issues I disagree with Romney on do not affect me as profoundly as the issues I disagree with Obama on
Click to expand...


No, that's not the topic.

Give me specific reasons why you are voting for Romney using his plans in specific areas and compare it to Obama's. As a citizen of this nation allowed to vote certainly you take this seriously enough to provide that information
 
CJ 2.0 said:
That's what I've been trying to point out to Obama and his supporters for yours now.

Seriously, the reductions to medicare funding have very real effects, completely unrelated to the straw man arguments invented by Obama and his campaign.

Oh, and an 8 year extension of solvency on a massive entitlement program is f***ing useless. 2023 or 24 or whatever date they pulled out of their asses doesn't actually FIX the problem, now does it, considering very many of the SAME seniors using the program now will still be using it then.
Click to expand...

Seriously, Romney and Ryan support the same reductions, despite what they have suggested in recent weeks.
 
TurtleDude said:
1) Obama is incompetent and was elected for specious reasons including white guilt

2) Obama

3) Obama

4) Obama

5) Obama

6) Biden

7) Romney

8) Obama

9) the issues I disagree with Romney on do not affect me as profoundly as the issues I disagree with Obama on
Click to expand...

Well there's a ringing edorsement of Romney. :lamo
 
Because the premise of R/Rs economic plan is very similar to that of JFK's...

“It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.”– John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president’s news conference
Click to expand...

“It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today’s economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates.”– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”
Click to expand...

John F. Kennedy on taxes

Kinda confusing where Democrats lost their way in the last 50yrs...
 
Dickieboy said:
Because the premise of R/Rs economic plan is very similar to that of JFK's...





John F. Kennedy on taxes

Kinda confusing where Democrats lost their way in the last 50yrs...
Click to expand...

Entirely different economic times. Back then, the rich had been paying 90% in taxes and the wages were so good that 25% of take home pay was used for things ABOVE the necessities, including groceries. Jobs were abundant because there were anti-trust laws in place and that kept competition in the market place.

Democrats didn't lose their way They still focus on the middle class and poor. The republicans since Nixon have created huge income gap between their haves and the democrats middle class and poor. And that is why we need taxes. The rich haven't been paying their fair share given all the tax subsidies they get with their investments.
 
AdamT said:
That's your great example? Tobacco and alcohol are heavily regulated and the companies that make those products are still hugely profitable. Any more examples? How about insurance? Insurance is heavily regulated and insurance companies are hugely profitable. Banks? Banks are heavily regulated and they are among the most profitable companies in the world. Oil? Oil companies are heavily regulated and, as a group, are the most profitable companies in the world. Pharmaceuticals? Same story.

So no, regulation in and of itself does not mean economic death.
Click to expand...
Yes they are profitable because they are either:
1. Sold to addicts.
2. Are in great need; cannot live without.

Now... have you seen the price of gas these days? You know a person who smokes is paying what... 5 bucks a pack for a product that costs pennies? Why is that? The pigs of government slapping on taxes or creating regs that cripple production of a product like gasoline.

Government adds what value to this process? ZERO... yet they drive up prices like crazy.
 
Muddy Creek said:
Entirely different economic times. Back then, the rich had been paying 90% in taxes and the wages were so good that 25% of take home pay was used for things ABOVE the necessities, including groceries. Jobs were abundant because there were anti-trust laws in place and that kept competition in the market place.

Democrats didn't lose their way They still focus on the middle class and poor. The republicans since Nixon have created huge income gap between their haves and the democrats middle class and poor. And that is why we need taxes. The rich haven't been paying their fair share given all the tax subsidies they get with their investments.
Click to expand...

Less than 50,000 out of 83 million taxpayers were in the 90% bracket.

Today, more than 4 million taxpayers out of 140 million are in the highest bracket.

The share of income taxes paid by the top 10% of earners has increased since the 1970s from 41% to 55%.
 
CJ 2.0 said:
That's what I've been trying to point out to Obama and his supporters for yours now.

Seriously, the reductions to medicare funding have very real effects, completely unrelated to the straw man arguments invented by Obama and his campaign.

Oh, and an 8 year extension of solvency on a massive entitlement program is f***ing useless. 2023 or 24 or whatever date they pulled out of their asses doesn't actually FIX the problem, now does it, considering very many of the SAME seniors using the program now will still be using it then.
Click to expand...

You made a false claim. I linked the fact check.
 
Fisher said:
Since not that many established private practice doctors in my area have privileges at the only hospital in my city after the for profit facility tried to make them work there for peanuts, I an skeptical that quality of care will not be impacted when downward payment pressure is put on all hospitals. Unless it is literally life or death people already go to other hospitals in the region. When the husband of a woman I know had a heart attack, he was given meds in the ER and had to be airlifted to another hospital about an hour away by ground because the cardiologist was not working when he came into the ER. WTF kind of cutbacks can you make if you cannot even keep a cardiologist available 24/7--it isn't like heart attacks are rare occurrences?
Click to expand...

few doctors are available 24/7. This is one reason why they team up. And it may be the patient needed measures that could only be done at another hospital. there is too much we likely don't know here. But if a qualified doctor was there, and he could help, and risked the patients life (a law suit waiting to happen), it would be on him any way you look at it.

Understand, there is few to no one calling for more staff, more payment, more spending. The conservative idea is largely that if we take away payers, it will fix itself. That would in fact be more drastic. Increasing the pool of those who can pay, the insured, helps hospitals. It doesn't hurt them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom